
Cloud Vulnerability DB
A community-led vulnerabilities database
The ConformityCheck class in giskard-checks rendered the rule parameter through Jinja2's default Template() constructor. Because the rule string is silently interpreted as a Jinja2 template, a developer may not realize that template expressions embedded in rule definitions are evaluated at runtime. In a scenario where check definitions are loaded from an untrusted source (e.g. a shared project file or externally contributed configuration), this could lead to arbitrary code execution.
giskard-checks is a local developer testing library with no network-facing service. Check definitions, including the rule parameter, are provided in application code or project configuration files and executed locally. Exploitation requires write access to a check definition and subsequent execution of the test suite by a developer.
However, the implicit template evaluation of the rule parameter is not obvious from the API surface. This hidden behavior increases the likelihood of a developer inadvertently passing untrusted input to it when integrating the library into a larger system.
conformity.py, line 59:
from jinja2 import Template
...
formatted_rule = Template(self.rule).render(trace=trace)giskard-checks < 1.0.2b1
giskard-checks >= 1.0.2b1 (template parsing removed from rule evaluation entirely)
Upgrade to giskard-checks >= 1.0.2b1. The template rendering has been removed from rule evaluation.
Giskard-AI thanks @dhabaleshwar for identifying the unsandboxed template usage.
Source: NVD
Free Vulnerability Assessment
Evaluate your cloud security practices across 9 security domains to benchmark your risk level and identify gaps in your defenses.
Get a personalized demo
"Best User Experience I have ever seen, provides full visibility to cloud workloads."
"Wiz provides a single pane of glass to see what is going on in our cloud environments."
"We know that if Wiz identifies something as critical, it actually is."